Did You Know...

The New York Daily News has a story today about the man who would be the first president whose hair required its own Secret Service detail. The piece is entitled “Conservatives are backing the comb-over candidate for 2012.”

He stole the show with an impromptu speech at the recent Conservative Political Action Conference, telling the audience he’s “pro-life” and against gun control, higher taxes and President Obama’s health-care law.

As a conservative, that sounds good to me — on the surface. Scratching just beneath that surface though, Trump may have trouble explaining to conservatives why, if he’s against Obamacare (oops, sorry Debbie Wasserman-Schultz), why did he contribute money to the re-election campaign of Anthony Weiner, one of the health care bill’s self-proclaimed authors?

If Trump’s against gun control (or corruption for that matter), why the contribution to Charles Rangel, who rates an “F” on gun rights from the NRA (as does Weiner and others on The Donald’s donation list)?

Trump says he’s pro-life, but has given money to Hillary Clinton and Chuck Schumer — two politicians who make thrills go up NARAL’s leg.

Trump’s contributed money to the campaigns of Frank Lautenberg, Ted Kennedy, Patrick Kennedy, Harry Reid, Arlen Specter and Dick Durbin — so much for the “lower taxes” concern. Could a true “conservative” have brought himself to sign any of those donation checks without slitting his wrists with the pen afterwards?

According to Newsmeat, 23% of Trump’s candidate contributions have gone to Republicans, and 31% to Democrats:

Do Trump’s political donations only reflect a businessman trying to cover a broad spectrum so he has a leg up in any political climate? George Soros doesn’t seem to feel the need to give money to candidates who go against his stated political principles — if that’s what you can call them.

Maybe a reporter in an upcoming interview can give Trump a chance to explain this track record of supporting liberal politicians, but a satisfactory explanation to conservative voters could prove more difficult than Newt Gingrich’s chore of trying to erase this picture from my memory.